This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Ummm...if the Senate has not adjourned, they're still in session. They cannot be on recess while still in session. Cut and dry.

Hmmm. Then why do they have to come back every three days and prove they are in session? If they don't adjourn, then that should be enough.[/QUOTE]

And of course "they" don't actually come back at all. One guy comes back to put on the charade that they are conducting business, which in fact they are not. Because ... you know ... only one guy is there playing make believe.

Ahem!....Let's take a look at your own posting from the Glossary of the Senate:

pro forma session - A brief meeting (sometimes only several seconds) of the Senate in which no business is conducted. It is held usually to satisfy the constitutional obligation that neither chamber can adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other.

Adjourn, hmmm...Interesting word right? What does that word mean?

Definition of ADJOURN
transitive verb
: to suspend indefinitely or until a later stated time
intransitive verb
1
: to suspend a session indefinitely or to another time or place
2
: to move to another place

Now come on libs, there was no suspension of the Senate, therefore they were NOT in session. Now, weather or not there will be anything done about this other than rhetoric, and soundbytes is another question. But, that will be a showing of weather or not the republicans have the fortitude to press this, or let Obama get away with wadding up our constitution for his own political purposes. Either way we lose.

j-mac

Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.
Alexis de Tocqueville

The senate WAS in recess, meeting for 60 seconds just to get around that does not count, and that shal be proven in the court of law. Im willing to bet the GOP wont even sue because they KNOW they will lose. Im willing to bet my life earnings that Obama was well within his means as president to do this.

The senate WAS in recess, meeting for 60 seconds just to get around that does not count, and that shal be proven in the court of law. Im willing to bet the GOP wont even sue because they KNOW they will lose. Im willing to bet my life earnings that Obama was well within his means as president to do this.

If you are so sure that they were in recess, then you should be able to answer the question that I keep posting in here, and everyone arguing this ignores...

Show me where Boehner gave consent for the Senate to recess. it should be a matter of public record...If you're so sure that is...

Simply saying it isn't fair that the Senate uses pro forma sessions to block recess appointments isn't an argument, it is an excuse to circumvent the constitution. And that should alarm libs, as well as conservatives.

j-mac

Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.
Alexis de Tocqueville

Now come on libs, there was no suspension of the Senate, therefore they were NOT in session. Now, weather or not there will be anything done about this other than rhetoric, and soundbytes is another question. But, that will be a showing of weather or not the republicans have the fortitude to press this, or let Obama get away with wadding up our constitution for his own political purposes. Either way we lose.

j-mac[/QUOTE]

"Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

The Senate has followed the proper protocols. Protocols that Obama's own Justice Department argued for. These protocols compel a President to act with the advice and consent of Congress. Such advice and consent Obama has shunned. Now Obama has taken a further unprecedented step to take power from the Legislative. The community organizer needs to be shown the door.

From what I can see as to the reaction to Obama's action, I would surmise that once again he has got away with extending his middle finger to America.